This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Bobby Jones (golfer) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on September 27, 2018. |
I had written an expanded bio. on Bobby Jones and thus "...helped Wikipedia". I thought it was a fairly decent and well written article. However, for some reason it was deleted with the explanation that I had "...made a mess...". Could someone explain to me what is meant by "mess" and how I can avoid making "messes" in future. Thank you.
-> This entire article has a biased point of view. Much of it just makes wild claims about Bobby Jones being "the greatest" without stating any real facts or regarding these opinions as just that - opinions. Instead, they are made as statements. I fixed one of the last lines on the page to a more neutral point of view. It had previously stated that "Bobby Jones is without a doubt the greatest golfer the world has ever seen." Even though the next line says, "However some disagree" that still doesn't make such a bold statement any less ridiculous. That's something you'd find in a biography of Bobby Jones - not in an 'encyclopedia article' where people are looking for facts and figures and history... not silly opinions.
@ 2006-07-16 23:33Z
Jones also spoke six languages. It is like sports before drugs. Now the times have changed and it is hard to compare. Vandals delete, non-vandals add value. Robert Tyre "Bobby" Jones Jr was an adder of value. The movie shows radio evolving, and the first radio broadcast from the golf course happened following Robert Tyre "Bobby" Jones Jr. I am looking to find a Jones figure in Wikipedia. That is the new sport of note. Keep up the good work. RoddyYoung 04:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
I really like the new table, but the colors are kind of hard to understand. What do red and blue mean? — Disavian ( talk/ contribs) 16:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I've made the table for all golfers with at least 5 major championship wins, but my goal is to make the table for all major championship winners. If you click on the link for golfers with most major championship wins, you can see the tables for other golfers as well. The colors are somewhatt arbitrary besides The Masters, which is understandably green. US Open is pink, Open Championship is blue, and PGA is purple. The purpose of the colors is simply to differentiate them. I based the table off of the grand slam wins sections of the tennis players' pages. Hopefully you will join the effort to make the table for other golfers as well. Thanks. Supertigerman 18:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Image:Stamp-ctc-bjones.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 07:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
The first sentence of the article ("one of the greatest golfers...") does not conform to the encyclopedic tone. Someone more familiar with Bobby Jones should rewrite it to summarize Jones' achievements without taking a subjective perspective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.165.106 ( talk) 03:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
There's a neutrality warning on the article, but I don't see where there is a discussion about any particular issue in it. If there's no particular problem, the tag should be removed. PK T(alk) 14:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
i noticed you did not list an Amateur championship wins as "Major Championship Wins" for any of the other great champions as was the case with Bobby Jones . i.e.... Nicklaus, Woods, etc.
Please explain.
thanks Brian bwashi2@entergy.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.200.9.48 ( talk) 05:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bobby Jones (golfer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:35, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bobby Jones (golfer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:46, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Bobby Jones (golfer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://157.166.226.103/augusta/inaugusta/news/2002/04/08/jones_statue/{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.la84foundation.org/SportsLibrary/AmericanGolfer/1921/ag2411e.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:16, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bobby Jones (golfer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:57, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
In a series of edits, User:FieldMarine added categories to the article and also moved the birth and death categories to the beginning of the list. When I reverted the movement of these categories he reverted, saying "Arrange cats to standardize - please take to talk page first before moving again - thanks." According to WP:CATDEF, "the order in which categories are placed on a page is not governed by any single rule (for example, it does not need to be alphabetical, although partially alphabetical ordering can sometimes be helpful). Normally the most essential, significant categories appear first." There is no standard. My edit arranged them in a logical manner: golf categories first, miltary cats next, then occupation cats, then educational cats, then misc. cat, ending with born/died. These groupings are arranged by most important to least important, as per WP:CATDEF (although an argument could be made to switch the military and occupation groups). I propose my re-ordering is more logical. Tewapack ( talk) 17:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Please provide the rationale for why birth and living / death is least defining cat, and thus should be on the bottom. That is an opinion, that opinion does not seem to be supported by a large majority of articles in Wikipedia. Semper fi! FieldMarine ( talk) 21:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
That is an opinion, and does not provide rational of why birth and living / death is least defining. Nor is that opinion supported by many articles throughout Wikipedia, where birth and living / death cats is at the top. Many would argue that the birth and living would provide context to the time period of a person, etc, thus very defining. There could be other arguments as well for why birth and living / death are not the least defining, but I'm not an expert. Semper Fi! FieldMarine ( talk) 22:31, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
Per category schemes for people, there is no consensus about the order in which categories should be placed at the bottom of an article. By placing birth and living / death cats on the top of many articles, many other editors have determined that these cats are defining enough to place them on the top. Why are golf article different? Semper Fi! FieldMarine ( talk) 01:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
OK, while I don’t necessarily agree, it is obvious you feel strongly about this article and the ordering of the cats, and I view that as good thing. Please order the cats however you think best. Semper Fi! FieldMarine ( talk) 19:41, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
This recent edition is worth discussing. https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Bobby_Jones_(golfer)&curid=434385&diff=1111406078&oldid=1110629681 —¿philoserf? ( talk) 21:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)